calweycn Posted August 15, 2006 Posted August 15, 2006 Can you add an option to limit the write speed for creating an ISO in Build Mode? It is very processor and drive intensive to have it running at full speed with no restriction. The computer can become extremely unresponsive due to this stress, reducing the ability to multi-task. I'd like to be able to limit the speed it writes the ISO.
blutach Posted August 15, 2006 Posted August 15, 2006 If you wish to ifree your process, perhaps set the app to below normal priority. ISO take about 2 minutes to make, however. Regards
volvofl10 Posted August 15, 2006 Posted August 15, 2006 BWA HA HA HA , the whole world wants things done faster and quicker, then someone suggests making something slower wasent so long ago that you could only write at 4x max , and you had to stop any AV prog running, dont open any other apps at the same time ect ect . NOW i can build an ISO at I 22:56:53 Average Write Rate: 10,345 KB/s (69.0x) - Maximum Write Rate: 18,463 KB/s (123.1x) AND browse and have Word open at the same time and run AV LUk, can you slow it down please , maybe to 68x
blutach Posted August 15, 2006 Posted August 15, 2006 Don't let corny post his times. They makes me sick with how fast they are. Regards
volvofl10 Posted August 15, 2006 Posted August 15, 2006 his mrs said 3 minutes , but that included a smoke afterwards
volvofl10 Posted August 15, 2006 Posted August 15, 2006 i lied she said 2 minutes, but your a decent bloke so i added a minute on for you dont worry though , i DONT have a problem with my times but verifying was a problem ! the courts ruled it was my kid and i have to pay for the upkeep of it
calweycn Posted August 16, 2006 Author Posted August 16, 2006 If you wish to ifree your process, perhaps set the app to below normal priority. That doesn't help. Even if I'm not doing anything processor intensive, other programs will become slow to respond. And this is with multiple drives, not copying to the same drive. There's no way to limit the speed unless it gives you the option. I guess I just won't use this feature, since it takes away my computer's functionality. I have 1.5 GB of RAM and lots of free memory. If the program wants 100% of my hard drive time, that's too much.
calweycn Posted August 16, 2006 Author Posted August 16, 2006 wasent so long ago that you could only write at 4x max , and you had to stop any AV prog running, dont open any other apps at the same time ect ect . NOW i can build an ISO at I 22:56:53 Average Write Rate: 10,345 KB/s (69.0x) - Maximum Write Rate: 18,463 KB/s (123.1x) AND browse and have Word open at the same time and run AV I don't have any problem browsing or editing documents or even watching a movie while it writes, but it not go over about 20x average and 60x max. Multi-tasking certain applications creates a lot of slow down.
Shamus_McFartfinger Posted August 16, 2006 Posted August 16, 2006 Just a quick test reading/writing to the same drive. Notice the cpu usage of ImgBurn? Not what I'd call a very demanding process.
calweycn Posted August 16, 2006 Author Posted August 16, 2006 (edited) Just a quick test reading/writing to the same drive. Notice the cpu usage of ImgBurn? Not what I'd call a very demanding process. The demand on the I/O system is more the problem, I think. Perhaps this isn't an issue if you have SATA. Not everyone has a cutting edge system. It makes sense to allow people to limit the speed for ISO write just as you can limit the speed in other modes. Why not force you to burn everything at max speed, if that's LUK's philosophy? We seem to be going back to the all-or-nothing logic, common in other threads here. If that's the only answer people can offer, you might as well not even bother responding. I think customization has value and yes the option to do things slower has value. Whether you agree with that is irrelevant. What would it hurt to have the option? Edited August 16, 2006 by calweycn
Shamus_McFartfinger Posted August 16, 2006 Posted August 16, 2006 Just a quick test reading/writing to the same drive. Notice the cpu usage of ImgBurn? Not what I'd call a very demanding process. The demand on the I/O system is more the problem, I think. Perhaps this isn't an issue if you have SATA. Not everyone has a cutting edge system. Demand on the I/O? Are you serious? To prove a point, the snapshot test below was done on a different and slower pc. It used a network drive as the source and a standard IDE drive as the destination. This pc also doubles up as a file server for various common drives which are constantly in use. It makessense to allow people to limit the speed for ISO write just as you can limit the speed in other modes. Why not force you to burn everything at max speed, if that's LUK's philosophy? Now you're being ridiculous again. You want to limit the speed of a 5 minute operation? Why not put a rubber band around your wedding tackle so it takes you longer to go for a squirt if that's your philosophy?If that's the only answer people can offer, youmight as well not even bother responding. If your constant sulking is the only thing you have to offer, you might as well not even bother posting. I think customization has value andyes the option to do things slower has value. Whether you agree with that is irrelevant. What would it hurt to have the option? Would it hurt to appreciate the program for what it is?
spinningwheel Posted August 16, 2006 Posted August 16, 2006 Would it hurt to appreciate the program for what it is? YEA BABY!!!.....
blutach Posted August 16, 2006 Posted August 16, 2006 Got me beat why he keeps on and on and on and on. Same with the other crap. Back in post 2, the boss said no. Like a little kid, he can't accept it. Terrible state to be in. @calweycn - If the prog doesn't do what you want, time for you to go and write one that will. And please, fgs, stop whinging. Regards
pfeerick Posted August 17, 2006 Posted August 17, 2006 ... What would it hurt to have the option? @calweycn, You've already heard the decision by the person investing the time and effort to write the program you're criticizing, so please shut up if you've got nothing better to say to the experienced forum members who have been here, supporting LightingUK! since before ImgBurn existed, and also taking the time to support other newcomers like myself. I, also, might like to see an option like the one you suggested, but once Lightning UK! has ruled it out, I'm not going to continue pestering him and abusing other forum members like you have. If you don't mind your manners, Lightning UK! may have to resort to banning you from this forum. Thats all I have to say, and If you reply to this, you are just proving my point, which is that you can't accept any criticism at all, and can't accept it if somebody says "no" to you. pfeerick
LIGHTNING UK! Posted August 17, 2006 Posted August 17, 2006 calweycn, You have to remember that although other modes have speed settings, those are totally controlled by the drive, not by the program. The program always works at 'full steam ahead'. To slow it down for Build mode I'd have to perform some sort of throttling via wait (sleep) commands as and when I/O transfer rates went above a certain level. It's too much faffing around for very little gain. If there's something you urgently need to do and a 'build' is slowing you down, just pause it. If you must build an image rather than going direct to disc, build it to a different physical hdd and your machine will find the task much easier. If you don't have one of those, maybe it's time to invest in one - especially if you're going to be doing this kind of thing frequently. While you're at it, stick some more RAM in your PC too. Sorry but the answer is still no.
Recommended Posts